Following the best project management practices is believed to improve

Question

Following the best project management practices is believed to improve project success. However, even after training the entire project team on the best project management practices last month, the monthly project deliverables were late. Obviously, our project team failed to learn from training.

Which of the following,if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?

A. Effects of following the best project management practices often show up after a few months of application.
B. Projects team that have undergone the best management training often miss monthly deadlines.
C. The monthly project deliverables last month were late only by 2 days, an insignificant duration that could not really have impacted project success.
D. Although the best project management practices generally improve project success, there are exceptions.
E. The delay was because of external dependencies and the project team did not have any control over those factors.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects: 
 
   Data Sufficiency Butler 
   Problem Solving Butler  
   Sentence Correction Butler  
   Reading Comprehension Butler  
   Integrated Reasoning Butler

wadhwakaran · Answer

Conclusion: The training did not help the employees because the project was delivered late.

To weaken the conclusion we need to prove that the reason for the delay was not the employees but something else. In that sense, the training would not have failed.

Option E

Posted from my mobile device

sumit99kr · Answer

Since the question is about  MOST WEAKEN  - the answer option should include a strong, narrow, and specific reason. It should not be a general weakening statement or something that weakens only partially.

Conclusion- project team failed to learn from training.

We need to bridge the gap between learning and output. The project team could have learnt from the training but the results might take some time to show up.
Also, the argument says that it's been a month since the training was given ( "last month" ). Clearly one month might be too short a duration to expect the results.

This thought process is captured by option A. Hence, I would go with A.

Bunuel · Answer

Experts' Global Video Explanation:

Yr-S0_vDDKg

Nielgmat · Answer

C. The monthly project deliverables last month were  later  only by 2 days, an insignificant duration that could not really have impacted project success.

I think,  'later ' is a typo. It should be  'late' . That is also how it appears in the official solution.

Nielgmat · Answer

Sorry, but there is something more that I find amiss here. The answer option (E) is as under:-

E. The delay was because of external dependencies and  the project team  did not have any control over those factors. 
I guess it is safe to assume that 'the project teams' are the ones that have undergone the training...

Whereas, in the official explanation it is worded differently, as under:-
 "Delay in project deliverables is sometimes because of external dependencies that project teams have no control over." 
Which project teams? Have these teams undergone the said training?

Not only is it worded differently, but also the option is eliminated in the official explanation based on the word "sometimes" which does not appear in the Question's answer choices.

I have some more queries on this Question, but I guess I 'll have to hold on till there's some clarity on this issue..

Am I missing something?
Bunuel, Pls help.

mysterymanrog · Answer

I am no expert, but here is my understanding of the question: 
The conclusion of the argument is that the team did not learn anything from the training and the task is to weaken this argument, therefore we must find a choice that shows that maybe, in spite of the delay, the team still did learn something from the training. E does not provide that effect. It provides a reason why there might have been a delay, but when you compare it to choice A, E falls short. A clearly casts doubt on the conclusion: If the effects of the training only appear after 2 months, how can we say that, after only 1 month, that the team did not learn anything? This is a much stronger choice than E, which does not,in my opinion, impact the argument.

Hope this helps!

Maria240895chile · Answer

I eliminated E because the issue is wether the team learned the practices or not, and E is focused just in the delay of the project. So there is the possibility that even though the delay was caused by factors that the team has not control over, that they did not learn the practices. (A) focus in the possibility that the team did learn the practices

Vibhatu · Answer

This is  Totally Wrong . Think this way..
The argument says that it's been a month since the training was given ( "last month" ). Clearly one month might be too short,  but suppose they finished the training on January 1st and then they taking the actual project on February 28, then its last month but actually two months time.  Then obviously two months is sufficient, as  we don't know what does it mean by the word "FEW", whether it is one, two, three or 12 months timeline.

Therefore answer is E

Vibhatu · Answer

Think this way  Bunuel 
The argument says that it's been a month since the training was given ( "last month" ). Clearly one month might be too short,  but suppose they finished the training on January 1st and then they taking the actual project on February 28, then its last month but actually two months time.  Then obviously two months is sufficient,  as we don't know what does it mean by the word "FEW", whether it is one, two, three or 12 months timeline.

Therefore answer is E

mysterymanrog · Answer

The issue with your reasoning is that there is no indication that the periods are set up in the way you said, one could make the exact opposite assumption and the reasoning would not hold.

Moreover, the core of the argument is  "the project team failed to learn from training" . Even if they had a delay, which was not controllable, why would this show that they actually learned from training? There is no reason to believe that. It is entirely possible that there was a delay, which was caused by factors that the team could not control, and that the team did not learn from the training. Statement A undermines the assumption that the argument is making - the argument is assuming that because there was a delay, the team did not learn from the project. However, if learning from the project requires a few months time, but the project was undertaken a month later, then clearly that assumption is undermined. E only shows the nature of the delay (that it was something external) but this does not help to determine if the team learned or not. A shows that clearly, there is still a good chance that the team learned in spite of the delay.

Gemmie · Answer

The Argument Recap:
 Premise:  The project team was trained on best project management practices.
 Observation:  Despite the training, the monthly project deliverables were late.
 Conclusion:  The project team failed to learn from the training.

A. Effects of following the best project management practices often show up after a few months of application.  
 Reasoning:  This option suggests that the results of training, particularly in project management practices, are not immediate. It implies that the team might have learned from the training, but the benefits of that learning will only become apparent after some time.
 Why It Weakens the Conclusion:  The conclusion that "the project team failed to learn from the training" assumes that the effects should have been immediate. If, however, the effects of the training are expected to take a few months to manifest, then the team's failure to meet deadlines shortly after the training does not necessarily indicate that they failed to learn. Therefore, this option weakens the conclusion by providing a plausible reason for the delay that does not imply a failure to learn.

B. Projects teams that have undergone the best management training often miss monthly deadlines. 
 Reasoning:  This option suggests that missing deadlines is common even after receiving the best management training.
 Why It’s Less Effective:  While this could suggest that training doesn’t always guarantee timely deliverables, it does not directly address whether this specific team's late deliverables were due to a failure to learn from the training. It doesn't offer an alternative explanation specific to this team’s situation.

C. The monthly project deliverables last month were late only by 2 days, an insignificant duration that could not really have impacted project success. 
 Reasoning:  This option minimizes the impact of the delay.
 Why It’s Less Effective:  Although this suggests the delay was minor, it does not directly challenge the conclusion that the team failed to learn from the training. It focuses on the significance of the delay rather than whether the delay was linked to the team's learning from the training.

D. Although the best project management practices generally improve project success, there are exceptions. 
 Reasoning:  This option introduces the idea that best practices do not always lead to success.
 Why It’s Less Effective:  While it acknowledges that there are exceptions, it does not provide a concrete reason why the deliverables were late in this specific case. It is more about the general effectiveness of best practices rather than a direct rebuttal to the conclusion that the team failed to learn.

E. The delay was because of external dependencies and the project team did not have any control over those factors. 
 Reasoning:  This option attributes the delay to factors outside the team's control.
 Why It’s Less Effective:  While this does weaken the conclusion by offering an external reason for the delay, it doesn’t address whether the team actually learned from the training. It shifts the blame for the delay but doesn't directly confront the learning outcome from the training.

ablatt4 · Answer

Their is some debate here between answer A and E, I too struggled with this but eventually was able to see why A is correct

B) Even if the teams often miss monthly deadlines, they don't always and therefore this isn't the best answer choice although it is tempting
C) Late is late, so not really relevant
D) If you are an exception because the training that usually worked fails on you then you did fail the training

Here is the real debate

A) suggests we need more time to see as it usually takes adjustment
E) suggests we couldn't have controlled the factors that made us fail

My key distinction here is that E is true whether or not the team underwent training. Had they not underwent training they still could have been screwed by external factors so even though this would excuse their failure and weaken the argument, it would not empirically rule out whether or not the training worked,

A clearly states that it is simply too early to tell and therefore the training very well may have worked and the member are adjusting to new practices

This is a harder question than 655 I would say but A is correct.

wcyamanda · Answer

Hi Bunuel, I watched the experts global explanation and it seems like option E is missing the word "sometimes" which was in the original experts global prompt (and also the reason why they eliminated option E).

Following the best project management practices is believed to improve

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards